Parshios Tetzaveh & Purim

Purim Issues

Question: Are women obligated to go to shul to hear the Torah reading
of Parashas Zachor?

Discussion: There is a mitzvah min ha-Torah to read Parashas Zachor
from a Sefer Torah once a year. Although the Rabbis have instituted that
Zachor be read in public on the Shabbos before Purim, the mitzvah can
technically be fulfilled by performing it at any time during the year.
Several poskim, therefore, consider the reading of Parashas Zachor to be a
mitzvah which is not time-bound, thus making it obligatory upon women.
1 Other poskim disagree, however, and consider the reading of
Zachor a time-bound mitzvah from which women are exempt. 2

In addition, there is an opinion that holds that women are exempt from
Zachor for a different reason. Making mention of the evil perpetrated on us
by Amalek is a mitzvah that is limited to those who can and will fight
against Amalek. Since women do not bear arms and go out to war, they are
exempt from the mitzvah of mentioning the treachery of Amalek. 3

There are conflicting views among the poskim as to the practical halachah.
Some rule that women are obligated to hear Parashas Zachor in
shul4 while other poskim note that it is commonly accepted
that women do not go to shul to hear Parashas Zachor. 5 Since
there is no clear-cut ruling, 6 it is commendable for women to
make the effort to go to shul to hear the public reading of
Zachor7 . Indeed, in many congregations it is the accepted
practice for women to do so.
It is questionable if a Sefer Torah may be taken out of the Aron ha-Kodesh
specifically to read Zachor for women. While the custom is some communities
is to permit this practice, 8 other poskim do not permit
taking out a Sefer Torah for women only. 9
Men or women who are unable to go to shul should read Parashas Zachor aloud
for themselves from a Chumash since, according to some poskim, one can
fulfill the mitzvah in this fashion. 10

Question: Is a son required to listen to his father’s strict orders
not to become inebriated on Purim?

Discussion: Generally, a child is not allowed to listen to a parent’s
command if the parent tells him to do something which is in any way contrary
to the halachah. Since the halachah obligates one to drink on Purim until he
can no longer distinguish between baruch Mordechai and arur Haman,
11 it would seem that a son should disregard his parent’s
request not to get drunk on Purim.
Harav S. Z. Auerbach, 12 however, ruled otherwise. He
explained that the halachah does not require one to become inebriated to the
degree of ad delo yada. Rather, as the Rambam and Rama13 hold,
one can drink just a bit of wine (a little more than his customary daily
amount), and then go to sleep. This is enough wine to fulfill the mitzvah,
since in his sleep one is certainly not able to distinguish between “blessed
be Mordechai” and “cursed be Haman.” Since the son can fulfill the mitzvah
in that manner, he has no right to ignore an explicit command from his
father prohibiting him to get drunk.

Question: Who should recite the berachos when a man, who has already
read or heard the Megillah in shul, reads the Megillah for a group of women?

Discussion: The preferred method depends on several factors:

• If there are fewer than ten women present, then each woman should recite
the berachos herself. 14
• If there are ten or more women, there are two options: Either one woman
recites the berachos and exempts the rest of the group, 15 or
each woman recites her own berachos. 16 Either way is
l’chatchilah. 17
• If the women do not know how to recite the berachos, then the man reading
the Megillah recites the berachos for them. 18

Question: If there is no man available to read the Megillah for a
woman who was unable to go to shul, may another woman read the Megillah for her?

Discussion: A woman may read the Megillah for another woman but only
if she herself has not yet fulfilled her obligation of hearing the Megillah.
If she has already fulfilled her own obligation, she may not read it again
in order to exempt another woman. 19

Question: Do mishloach manos need to be delivered via a messenger or
may the sender deliver it directly to the recipient?

Discussion: The poskim are divided on this issue. There are three
opinions:

• Shulchan Aruch and most poskim 20 do not state a preference.
The basic halachah follows this view. 21
• Some poskim 22 hold that the word “mishloach” suggests that
the manos must be “sent” via a messenger. 23 The messenger may
be a minor or a non-Jew. 24
• A minority opinion holds that mishloach manos should l’chatchilah be
delivered directly and not via a messenger. 25

In order to satisfy both opinions, is it appropriate to send mishloach
manos both ways — once via a messenger and once directly. 26

Question: What is the proper amount and type of food that should be
sent for mishloach manos?

Discussion: Mishloach manos can be any combination of two kinds of
food, 27 or one food and one beverage, 2829 Although two pieces of the same food are
considered as one food, 30 the top (white meat) and bottom
(dark meat) parts of a chicken are considered two kinds of food.
31 Some poskim32 specify that the foods be ready
to eat and require no further cooking, while others33 allow
even uncooked foods to be sent.
L’chatchilah, one should send foods which could be eaten at the seudas
Purim. 34 Moreover, one does not fulfill the mitzvah properly
if all he sends is a small piece of food, etc. since manos is defined as a
portion which is considered worthy of serving others. Some poskim suggest
that the minimum amount of mishloach manos is a meal’s worth, about 6-7 fl.
oz. of food. 35 Other poskim require that one send no less of a
meal (in volume) than one would normally serve a guest. 36

A wealthy person who sends inexpensive items of food does not fulfill the
mitzvah properly, for in order for mishloach manos to be considered as an
expression of friendship, its cost must be relative to the sender’s wealth.
37 Similarly, one who sends inexpensive food items to a wealthy
person does not fulfill the mitzvah properly, since such items are worthless
in his eyes and unappreciated by him. 38